Posted on 09/18/2006 11:50:23 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Phil Maymin, the Libertarian candidate in the Fourth Congressional District, doesn’t want voters to flush away their ballots this November, calling a vote for a Democrat or a Republican a “waste.”
“If you’re unhappy with the course the country has been taking for the past 10 years, you have to realize that the Democrats and Republicans have made this mess,” he said at a meeting with reporters and editors from Hersam Acorn Newspapers Thursday, September 7.
Mr. Maymin, a Greenwich hedge fund manager, is running against Republican incumbent Rep. Christopher Shays, and Diane Farrell, the Democratic challenger. Just added to the ballot this week is also Richard Duffee, a Green Party candidate.
With 40 percent of registered voters in Connecticut unaffiliated with either major political party, Mr. Maymin says he is the candidate for “change and new directions.”
Giving his stance on a wide-range of issues including the war in Iraq, immigration and pollution, the talk at times turned more toward a discussion on political theory.
Explaining that small government is the most basic tenet of Libertarian philosophy, Mr. Maymin was blunt about its limited role: To uphold a system of justice and to provide national security. Period.
Beyond that, he said, government control should be deregulated on everything, from how parents should choose to educate their children to how much water can be flushed down a toilet.
Communist Iraq
Jumping right on the back of the elephant in the room, Mr. Maymin called for a July 4, 2007, deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq, which he declared is a communist country.
“Iraqis have guaranteed employment, free health care and free education at all levels. But the fact that the oil is owned by the people is the biggest thing that distinguishes it from other countries,” he said.
Though oil makes up 86 percent of Iraq’s gross domestic product, the country is now facing a shortage, which is one of the reasons for the erupting chaos, he said.
“What happens when the people own everything?” he asked. “Look at Ukraine, formerly the ‘bread basket of Communism,’ where the people owned everything. During that time, not once were the people able to feed themselves.”
Labeling himself the only candidate in this race who would have never voted to go to war in Iraq, Mr. Maymin did acknowledge that work must be done before the U.S. armed forces can be removed.
“There was no link before we invaded between Saddam (Hussein) and Al Qaeda. Now there is. We ask now, ‘What do we do to solve it?’ ” he said.
Iraq is divided into 18 regional governments, which are each at different levels of preparedness toward achieving self-governance, Mr. Maymin said. Before a transfer of power, each region must meet criteria that have to do with its ability to both quell terrorism and establish its own central control and stability.
“Meeting that (criteria) could go on 50 years if we don’t set a deadline,” he said. “We need not just an idea, but a fixed date.”
Economy
Turning the focus away from the turmoil in Iraq to the weakened national economy, Mr. Maymin described the Libertarian Party’s “fiscally conservative, socially liberal” philosophy.
“The freer the economy of a country, the more wealth there is and the less poverty,” he said. If elected to Congress, Mr. Maymin’s first act would be to “slash taxes and pay down the national debt.”
“We should remove the IRS completely, and replace it with a simple, 23 percent flat tax on retail items. April 15 then becomes just another day. All the money you make, you keep,” he said.
To keep the economy afloat without boxing out the poor, he reasoned, “the troubles of those who can’t afford to pay sales tax can be alleviated with rebates.” Not only will they get rebates, he added, “they will get rebates a month ahead of time to compensate toward the sales tax.”
Hypothesizing about a future America with minimal government control, Mr. Maymin was asked about how to avoid companies becoming mini-governments themselves. His response was that monopolies maintained by market power, and not by force, are healthy for the economy.
“The first transcontinental railroad was private, and it was cheap,” he said. “When government took over control there was a wasteful bloating … People who were paid to build the railroads were paid by the government on a per-foot-of-track basis. That’s why we have these meandering routes from New York to Boston and no efficient, high speed bullet-type trains.”
Immigration
Mr. Maymin took a hard-line stance on immigration that reiterated his belief that the duty of the government is to protect national security.
“We need to secure the borders — seal up every inch,” he said. “Every immigrant I’ve ever met has been a wonderful person, but the most important question is about national security ... We can’t fight a war on terror if we’re leaving the back door open. The people who are here illegally, are here illegally. I do not support any amnesty.”
Arguing for the use of manpower and technology to build walls around the country, Mr. Maymin said, “Building walls to keep people out is a reasonable Libertarian thing to do. Building them to keep people in is a communist thing to do.”
Other Issues
On a range of other issues, Mr. Maymin was consistent in his argument that government should stay away from business and out of people’s lives.
When asked about transportation in Connecticut, Mr. Maymin said that competition should be allowed among contractors to fix the highway problems and to break the “government monopoly.”
“When the project is turned over to the (lowest) bidders, they are accountable to the marketplace,” he said. “Then they will start implementing improvements, add extra lanes to highways, and create new technology with tolls that don’t slow traffic.”
Though he calls Social Security a bankrupt system, Mr. Maymin said older generations should “expect to get what they’ve been putting in.”
The younger generations, on the other hand, “should not expect to get anything out of it,” he said.
“People nearing retirement age understand they’ve been paying into the system. It is not unreasonable for them to get money... but for the rest of us, the numbers don’t work. It’s a system that needs to be phased out,” he said.
On education, Mr. Maymin argued that there is not enough choice for parents on how and where their children should be taught.
“Look at the choice of cell phone plans you have, and all the different phone services nationwide ... Look at the menu of McDonald’s and everything that a free market provides. Now look at your choice of schools. Do you go where you want? No, you go where you live,” he said.
Calling the situation “another example of a federal monopoly,” he argued “the people of Connecticut, the parents, should determine how to educate their children.”
The Libertarian Impact
If he is elected to Congress, Mr. Maymin said it will be a wake-up call for lawmakers across the political spectrum.
“If you elect a Republican or a Democrat, nothing will change,” he said. “If a Libertarian is in Congress … and (the politicians) see that the principles are espoused by the people, then they’re going to make sure to vote to look as Libertarian as possible.”
Using that argument, Mr. Maymin says he has already impacted politicians, taking credit for influencing Rep. Shays’ recent switch on his position on the war in Iraq.
Though his argument for small government would seem to contradict his decision to run for office, he said “A Libertarian understands that the rights of the people are superior to his own desires.”
Calling America the most Libertarian country in the world, having been founded on Libertarian principles of “life, freedom and personal responsibility,” Mr. Maymin said a vote for him “changes the future.”
“A vote for me gets into the minds of the politicians,” he said. “It is really a vote for your children and your grandchildren.”
MESSAGE TO THE TERRORISTS: "Hang on a little longer! If you can last another 10 months, we will give the country over to you! We'll be outta there like we were outta Saigon, and then Katy bar the door!"
Although I would agree with Libertarians on a lot of domestic issues, I find their foreign policy is superbly naive. I probably would be more in line with the paleocons, but the Libertarians have pretty much jumped on board with the Left as far as the war and as far as a lot of foreign policy is concerned---although CATO INSTITUTE is quite sane (as compared with Libertarian Party USA)
What would the libertarian response have been to the 911 murder?
And this is one of the main reasons the official platform of the Libertarian party goes nowhere.
Yes, people like myself are unhappy with Republicans. They'd consider an alternative.
But I am NOT a Liberal on the war. And I do NOT support Murtha foreign policy.
Second, give me credit for well earned cynicism. All political parties and their candidates care about is getting elected to obtain power. With a few exceptions...
That being the case, a Libertarian majority party would be as much of a disappointment as any majority political party proves to be.
Well, I haven't heard anything about libertarians in general calling for us to leave Afghanistan.
Attack Afghanistan.
Libertarians are WORSE than liberals...They actually believe they are "principled" when they vote for third party nutcases, and thus hand some offices to democrats.
He's right about one thing.. I do wish some LIbertarian was elected somewhere that would shake up the political spectrum. As much as I despise the democrats there not much to be pitching a tent about right now on the Republican side, and I have a mostly libertarian philosophy anyway.. not totally.
I would not, however, waste my vote on alibertarian if it just ended up going to help elect a democrat.
And that is the libertarian's real problem... most people who share their philosophy are too busy trying their damdest to prevent democrats getting elected to bother voting libertarian. I would if I could.
Just out curiousity, what would you call a Neo-Wilsonian nation building effort to convert the rabid Islamist hordes to liberal democracy?
Another example of why the Libertarians will never be anything but a fringe 1% of the vote.
Just more political petulance from the 100%er club. Just learn this chant and repeat it endlessly and you can be a Losetarian too. "Whaa you can ONLY do 100% of ONLY what I want. Whaaa!"
IDIOTIC (wilsonian nation building, not you)------I know I know. Thought out libertarian policy and paleocon as well states what you just said--but I think the Libertarian Party USA really didn't explain itself very well and just came off as anti war as any leftist. The difference is in the rationale which I think is very important.
Then the Republicans need to get more libertarian
I thought libertarians did not believe in supporting a military?? Did the belief morph into something else?
And the Libertarians need to get a brain
Libertarians don't want to get elected and actually be held accountable. They like to live in an abstract world where they can constantly complain about those who actually take the responsibility of governing.
"They actually believe they are "principled" when they vote for third party nutcases, and thus hand some offices to democrats"
What makes you think they owe republicans a vote in the first place?
You OWE your country to NOT allow democrats to control all branches of government so that they can STACK courts, and draw districts which will assure them absolute powers, making it impossible for your candidates, or republicans, to win in numbers to gain majorities...NEVER forget, that without majorities, all your principled ideas will have NO effect in law...You guys don't think past your noses, which are pointed upward as you claim "principled" superiority.
Sounds like a list of reason why we have TOO much government. Government that we cannot trust the GOP or the DNC with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.